The Sun. — London, England, 1810-05-12 00:00:00

ezent bjec litho° pie of iiefiy opi. r prk" as to 011 se' those 01.1slY ~ti~~i~~ .11)i 41- ; tra(,;, The h the" Ist c►f seer ' . yrlVi d Ties- that' ion . • )rivi' jy So n3 lO e 11 °, e of. .Yer' . f inch S the f In~~~ } ipit ,v11;-4 110 1 IP at ~ Elm 5~ o ,,se I ot) the 000 nentr malt ct its their 'Doing De" iroJi ) Qi i 3 +IOC coj fie la 0 Lls9° ro' ,15 ' L ~ ~;H u~5~ !iet;; iell ireit 004 IL. 11 lica fiod °cid SJth wed t-1-`` ll ntliputed precedents could - make it. That House ~,e '° ,; l ll‘ l commit for libel,. it was impossible to.deny. there was no L`rgoing against it; for it could n,ot be r e b ut t e d b y any 'evidenCe less than its'Af.E-- ike usage i•f Parliament Was, as . it were, a deed In e,idetice not, to be defeated .by moral testimony to ! 11,, contrary. He could not say, that tl!e House . Lad Ito such right, because their 'records said they so that he was .(to' Make use . of a law term), e ,,, 3 fopPed from denying the fuelum, to, which, as a 4 , l ember of that House ; he was a party. But there • aceil a gOod teal Of, declamatory noise about the invasion of the liberty of the subjede There had lived before them men, as 'much attached to !he -right of personal liberty as any the pre,ent Alines could boast. When the Habeas corpus. , Act 4 1id 14e Bur of Rights were passed into. laws, ;lid -the men whose public virtue consigned this I nvaluable legacy an Englishmen for ever—did Alley feel it necessary to come 'forward and Clain) of that House the redemption of the liberty of. the suh leet from the teazing tyranny of their caprice ? Did they - express . their apprehensions of. very undue PQ-wers . issurned .by: the House of Commons ? Did they feel any alarm, at - our privileges, oe think those Privileges - incompatible with the liberties they were created to secure ? He had already spoken to the tight—Ao the necessity, of vesting a discretioeary Povier 'somewhere in every government. The Qoustitution vested - that discretion in them; but it Was Objeded--:the Constitution vested it no where else. ; - and where, he would ask, in such a Go verntnent as: this—where could that discretion be t oore.2 , properlyr vested than in the Commons Re- Presentatives of a free Oeople?Were the great. men 'who- - Worked out' the salvation of our fiber ,t'es.i in the expulsion of. the' 'Stuarts '-from the Throne; and in the establishment of the Constito tion--were they hostile, either in principle or edn °ation, to the personal liberty of the subjeCt ? Was Ahe great‘Lord Somers a friend to arbitrary power in shy shape?' Was the able Sir William Maynard an 'nerny-to - the-Constitution ? Was Sir Joseph Jekyl man indifferent to 'the rights and privileges of Erig 'shnien ? Did these' men, upon" the memorable tittestion of the Kentish Petition—did. they for one. kloinent entertain a doubt of the legal and constitu tional right of that House to commit for libel? Did e nY One of them question the privileges of that House? id they not rather give to them - the weight ° li t s their united aut.,orities ? When Lfind, said Mr. is c ?ilsenby, the privileges-of this House sanctioned u3' the ablest and most upright Judges of the - Land "-by the most 'profound and incorrupt Statesmen by the purest Patriots—by the most constitu ',Dual' acid popular Ministers—by 'men who did net talk about AiDerty, but hazarded their lives 'to mare it ;-.-when I find he progress' of time 'ite• ngthening the work of their uoticd virtue with vie claims of antiquity--a work that it was not 'ecesaary ter:antiquity to make venetable—when I . 411, 1 d all thi,, I own that - were it possible for me. to • ho" , diipased, that my hand would tremble in the "ttempt. - ro tear down that noble fabric their patriot- 4 41 liaif reared; and their wisdom had pronou:lced t he faiteit and the firmest. in the world ! 'With t 'speiit lathe doctrine of contempts (hit bad recently - gone abroad, he must say that he did not concur In that Ooctr1; e.. Jt was knows, that formerly the two Hatises of Varliamece sat under the same roof, and tr ansacted !winless together. The time of their sepa ration is not exactly known. The right of th e tw.o 'louses, sitting thus in the High Court of Parliathent, t ° commit for conteiripf, would not be disputed. Did t hen the separation which afterwards, for obvious r easons of mutual convenience; took place bet Ween t he two Houses, as tlic form of their-sitting together "-did that separation divest them oftheir respective to assert the authority of ' , heir C - iurt, and pro tect the proCek:detgs therein from Al obstruction, ? whether cOnstructiv,: or otherwise ? He had no cl ,- )uht that when' they seperated each retained the same Power. The Rib A Hon. Gentleman next proceeded • quote the' am hority Df Lord Chief Justice Wit, mot, in support of the Right of the House to corn thtt generally. He' stated that - Chief Justice Wit: t hot, „f t h e . Kiag'S Bench, was a man of admirable a Paeity, deep and extensite learning, and unith tachable integrity. The passage to which' he was qi)t) Ut to refer was from a judgment prepa.ed by Chief Justice Wilinote but the case to which it re lated not having come on, the juCtlnent - itself had ' t ;ever been delivered. Here the Right 1-166.Gen t:',hait proceeded to read florn a book Which. lie ett• ld in his hand, observations to .the. following one was, " that in all Courts whatever, )4 !his country, the power of vindicating the rights, - , Privileges; acid authority of any Court, was. co- • with the existence of the Court itself." Ano her stated, " that the power of Parliament was.a Necessary incident- to Parliament, because it was )11cident to all Courts-Of Justice, whether of record (4 ' hot : .aucl'another'passage laid it down, .that Pti t l iege of Parliament was as much lex .terrce, and .i.riaucti within the exception of Maori Charta as ` l . ,t'Y one' part of the . known law -of the land that ": 4 come , within its exceptions.—Here Mr. Pon,. -Zlithby commented on the_alisurslity of construing " A agria Ctiarta . striEtly in every case. Did punish i!lientS 'affecting personal liberty never take place but ‘') conse man uence of convietion on Trial .by,. Jury -1- that ever Was.in Court-of Law, that ever ove leaves of a law book for half an hour his stUdy, but kneW' the' contrary ? If it were not 4, 1 c), ther e could - be no C.inon,:no ecclesiastical law.- t 'v hat had il,ey to do with the striaconstruaion Magna Charm, and yet they Were no part of , law, ? 'Atiother - passage stated, that he 'had ",aced every vestige otprivikege, but could not as its- introduCtiotrinto the common law. He 1 )c )k it therefore to be as ancient as the common It did' not make the common law, but it '"te'st' in' alliance with it. Attachments were the eeryo s ° old and legal means of punishing contempts. ` - otite m t I Ct . ° be punished forthwith, because th eY P g had the' effect of shaking men's allegiance to "le l by vilifying the judges (that is the Court) `:'' 11 0 are the channel through which the King's ills 'ee is 'to be communicated to the people. The t x : v( ) modes are attachment and trial by jury--they er e Pet to be confounded.—Murders were not to & Pt:wished by attachments, nor contempts to be tried qy juries ---the Court was to judge of what i -' n 'Pected the course of justice, and it "was not turn ! s4 le to others to remove that obstruCtion, ler during -itc h rut:note application justice was delayed. ,There. 1 Judges are not to be kept in Waiting at the dOor -1 a ?rand Jury room for that Grand Jury to deter-• mine whether ..heir proceedings have been ,ota structede of . which -they are the : best judges...—. Mr—Poosonby next proteedej to lead at .mate length detached passages from the judgerkeet of Lord Chief Justice xVilmot, ' , shewing the right of Judges to COiernit for libel Construed as Cotnemtets, auji construetive.obstruetions to. the course of jus tice; and there:oee to be punished by the summary, mode or attachment. Such was the reasoning of Lord . Chief Justice Wilmot; whichbelieved would be found to be a satisfactory cOonnentary. Upon t he sagaciouSpornplain ts of those who ranted so loudly against what' they called the absurdity of 'being ac : cusers, judges, aod executioners in their own cause., In thus cotrununicating his sentiments open the ' question before the House, he wished to be con sidered as not presumiog to give any advice, as to the course which then- ought to be pursued. In of any attempt to direct the Condo of . this House, he wished to be considered as delivering- his own horrible opinion in . his capacity of a Member of ParliaMent. And, indeed,,,from all that had al ready passed upon that subjea, .the Right Honour able Gentleman opposite possessed no right to call upon him for his views .or his opinion: On- pre vious occasions he stated both; but every thing he had said, every proposition he had offered,. were by them disregarded. No one was more proMpt than the Right grin. Gentleman (Mr, Percesefl) to controvert; and the House in its wisclem, was pleased to oVer rulethem. Nevertheless lie then felt it his duty to stand by the privileges of the Commons of England ; and in the exercise of that duty, lin adverting to . the particular line of conduct , . which in his view should then be' purined, ehe 'begged to impress upon -the House the paramount and absolute neces sity of adhering, in every step • that it took; to th e ancient rule of practice observed by their ancestors; in their genies - Is for the preservation of their privileges. He was aware that in-what he. was about to recommend, he run the risque cif expoiing him self to a considerable degree of popular odium: But that man would ill deserve consideration, who, deterred by the- apprehenSion of popUlar reproof, would in any great and pres s sing emergepcY, sur renderto hiS fears the conviaion of his judgirient. By such an impresSion he trusted never to 'he In fluenced to swerve from his public duty. Never, he trusted, when the events of- that day u...carne the subjects of future recital and rem .1 ke shOuld it be said of him; if so huMble an! individual grad claim to observation, that he was a man, in contradiction to his ftsllest cenVietiou, but in eoin pliance with popular delusion, surrendered theprivi leges of the Commons of England, and by such surrender,- gave a fatal :lid irrecoverable blow to the liberties of England. Reverting then to the ancient .rule of practice; it was,invariably the custom of that House to commit any person who made himself the instrument of calling into question its privileges.— Upou that rule of practice, -he-did feel it• his duty, to state his opinion, that the Solicitor who had caused the notice of adion to be served upon the Speaker should be committed. Such a course was not alone the prac tice-of that - House,; it was ailed open in all Courts invested 'with the power of commitment for a con tempt of its jurisdiction. In the Court of Chancery, for instance, where an injunction had been granted i --to stay proceediugs in an action at lawe the Aitor ney who would, atter such an injunction, venture to proceed, would subject- himself to an attachment, and be most certainly punished for a contempt of the jurisdiction of that Court. Was. not diet' the House of Com:lons fully empowered to take steps against a Solicitor who had proceeded to call its Speaker to. answer- for condila taken-in obedience .to its will, - and: which that 'House had adjudged to be necessary for the proteCtion of its privilegese?—, Most undoubtedly it had, and as in such a case the most correct line was to follow the conduct of their ancestors, the enforcement 'of such kt right in the present' instance was most advisable. • The next question to be considered was the peculiar situation in which the Speaker of that. House was at present placed. To many Members it appeared a tnost monstrous novelty, that the Speaker of the House of Commons should be obliged to appear in one of the Courts below, for au act which he had done in pur suance of the orders of that House. A novel pro ceeding it" certainly was, for which there was no precedent ; as to an action! brought against the Speaker, and of information, the' instatices were rare. Yet monstrous as it' appeared to-soma, and -novel 'as it must seem to all, it was his firm persuasion that- the Speaker ought to appear and put - in his plea to the action. Such course was open to him without the - slightest apprehension of his surrendering in the remotest degree the pri vileges of that Ho,..te, and such - course the House - could adopt, although it had determined to commit the Solicitor. As' an illustration of that opinion, he would suppose the case of an individual com misted by , the Court of Chancery for Contempt, whose Solicitor -had instituted an ae - tion in a Court of •Law for false imprisonment against the Chancellor. What were' the steps which it must be presumed the Lord -Chancellor would 'Un der such circumstances take For himself he would say, that if such a proceeding had occurred w hen he had the honour of holding the &eat Seal in Ireland, he would' have certainly felt 'it his - botiticien duty, under the jurisdiction of his own Court, to com mit--the solicitor, and to appear in the Court of Law to put 1-,:s plea. For unless such a course was adopted, hoW was it possible for the Courts belows to be apprised of the nature of the case ? how was it possible for theM to inform 'themselves -of those faas e without the knoWledge of which they could not know whether the injury complained of was committed in a private or public capacity? With respect to that House agreeing to Resolutions in the shape Of prohibition;;. to the Courts of Law not - to entertain causes in which its privileges were involved; such a course was a complete novelty, ! on which he could not be expec e ted decidedly to pronounce ; inasmuch as in the whole course of reading and. of practice he had never met with , such a precedent. It was necessary that . the CoUrts shoeld be informed of the na:ure-of the proceeding. The difficulty was as to the manner_ of making the communication.. Should the Speaker write ? If he did so, and were he (Mr. Ponsonby) a Judge ! presiding in the Court where the proceSs was instituted, without meaning - any personal disrespect • to the Speaker, he would most certainly take no notice of the letter, nor -treat it in that Court with the smallest e te4pece If, there, • there was no proper mode of proceeding, either by prohibition from that House, or by notification frorri the Cpeaker, ho'N was - 41)e House to pi oceed, except by'his,ap. : pellrance ?: For, tirely, to Court of Law in ignorance of the naaire of the case, aria after- Wards to find fault and quaKrel. with ptoceedings which that -Court might allow, from the want of_ the information .-which the Speaker could give;. would be an extreme exerc'tc;e . of th'e power of that Stretch of its privileges, which, with sortie justice, might subject them to the severest re ' probation of th e p eo pl e . Upon cvery view of thease; it was his opinion tllat the Speaker sho u ld p l ea d, and rhaftlie prea - sitoulit sta.e, that the a& of which , the .Platirtif cornPliitted , was done in obediefiCe to the orders of the douse of Commons, and that there. existed in no -Other Court a power to relieve him If after that appeararice.‘iAas . rnade, and such in ; formation wasconornunicated, a Count of LAWshould thirikstill .proper to proceed, by such n o 7‘t onld, in his view, most certainly exceed, its, jarris diationit would go , tar beyond, the limits of its authority .?nd pOwer ; but, indeed, he could not • bring himself to conceive that, ,aity constitutional tribunal of the land, that any Judge would, venture —venture, he would not say, qeca,tse be could not imagine that those placed in such .wise ..and elevated situations could', under ady circumstances, be guilty of that which would most cetiai* amount to a gross dereliCtion of their duty . —a gross transgres sion of the law of the land. But such a conse quence he Could not anticipate, feeling the confidence he did in the learning, the wisddm, and the .pn- NIT of the t-ibonals of the countty. Nor would lie restric' CIA confidence to the Courts of Law ; bk,wout , .l extend it most anxi-ously. ,to the g o o d . , - ; sense art'. observation of the country large. Should c . v.:ntS unfortanately prove that he had been Mstakea in :the dependence • that he had pl iced upon Lie nation's sense,-should it, or any 'con- siderahve iportion of it continue to be impt - essed with be fallacious thought that the possessio,n of the privileges of the liouse of Commons were fatal tone libetties of the people—should it exert, itself br the- pernicious purpose of undermining those privileges, then most certainly - ,hu people of Enghnd would lat. 'greatly and fatally misled. -It wat not because the vote of-that House; upon this or that public Measure ) , was opposed to the wish and opinion of the people ; it wos not because - their Representatives. had evinced a conduct which• the constituent . body at large disapproved ; it was not becauSe tibme - of 'their decisions could -not be defend ed, that the power of the Commons of England should beithen curtailed. No they were to be defended even under such circumstances, because a. blow,aime.d.at them-even in that House of Coin mons would affect and overthrovvits privileges, and with them the - - ix:ople's liberties- through everysuc cceding Parliament. Bat it might be contended that the possession and exercise of such privileges as that recently questioned. was too great and too dan gerousio be continued in any House of CommonS. They were, hoWever, .bortie in period's of otir his tory in WhiCh the people of England were most high nettled, and jealous, of the slightet invasion of their liberties. They were, admitted in some of ►he best periods of our hi,tory,'when many of our ablest.pre .decessors were engaged in arduous contests fur the rights of the.people. It was sincerely to be 'hoped that the people would continue to respea them, in- asmuch as they were the best barriers of proteaion to, their own most valuable interests. For in that -HOuse ought the people to expect, and to it they should look for security and proteetion. There was a new dottine afloat, and a strange .direction given to the popular hope.' Whilst 'their feelings were estranged frbm the Commons, the people of, Eng land were.dire6ted to look to the Crown for the guardian Ship. of their rights. .; What ! the Crown proteet the liberties of the English people ? At tached as he was to a limiledunonarchy, he would contend there never was, during the whole period of our history, a monarch, except the virtuous trio 4iarch now upon the throne of these realms,. who ever loved a House of Commons—there never was a King, with the same exception, who was not an. enemy to public liberty. He founded this opinion upon no invidious,comparisons of one reign with an other.: It was human nature; and there never yet lived the man Who loved that! power, which acted \ as .a cootroul upon his wishes,and his passions.. That -the family of Brunswick would long. continue to sopptrq*these uefeilco of whicii the - people of England placed them on the throne, all were ready to believe. But who would take upon himself to say, that: "even in future successions of that family A Prince might not appear jealous of the influence of the people, and anxious to destroy their weight:tit the constitutional balance: Under, such a state of events; to whom could the people look for proteaion and support ? What brc.neh of the Constitution could they- depend upon for a suc cessful resistance to the encroachment-, that th.:eat -ened their liberties with extinai6n ? To the HoUse of Commons in the full posseision of these privi leges, the efficacy of which' the rash and the deluded would now wish to dimini'sh. Was it not 'the House of Ccimmons; supported by the voice of the Nation, that resisted scccesshilly the tyrannic encroachments of the Stuarts, and uliiina:ely de throned that family, when it was found impoS sible to induce them_ to desist from their arhi trary proceedings ? Never. Was there , propagated doctrine more pernicious ; clelonive than that Which went to alienate thin that House the -popular 'Confidence,. in order to give it to the Crown. True tt Might be, that from Aets of that House the confidence of the Nation was shaken—true it might be, thafit was considered rather the instrument of the tlinisier than the organ of the public voice, (an - opinion which he considered pressed too Jar in this I , country) yet even under all these admissions, it was not upon the Crown that he could he induced to de pend for the preservation of the people's rights. If the grievances of which the country complained were to be attributed to the construion of that House, let that coiistruCtion. be altered, if the Na tion- Wished' and demanded it.- But whilst it was necessary that a discretionary power ; should elist, where, be asked, could it be entrusted with -more slifety, than to the Representatives of the People of England,-;.-But then it had been contended, that . though there was . no objection to concede a -dis cretionary pov, er to that House, yet its exercise should be limited. 'Was then the Court of King's Bench, or was the public opinion to he the-stan ' dard Of - regulating to what extent the power should be exercised ? It the King's Bench was to possess • ,M pri‘c ty,ying tot .lgattypf, itsprtv4egeA or? }}} , committnet4s,' for Would be, inOsted,with.. theipoWer of being,the Judo;ofevery that House.. : . There could he rip limitation.,.. :y.,ery right of. hob - ling a, plea the casp,pf,b6, aa , Would cor,stittate, the right of trying ,the.exteht privilege in any other case. .Suppose a,,persen, was mnaliti!,l for stril.:ing rind violently assaulting the, Seljeant at Arms, or any .Mes?enger of the Rel. - vie in the ex-eo!iion of theirduty, and that for staff breach. of privilcg,! it Cortitnitted 3e brings Isis action in, a •Court of Law ; nrithing,can pteVent, him, and the Court must bold plea, upon : the: prin 7 ciple, that it had interfered before in the .case et libel, acid,that it must nrftw see whether the Hotne • of Corm - 110s had the power to do the aX,or In - such_ case what became of the privii.egesof the . Commons of England ? Again--WaS, public opi- . - nion' to be the crit:'rion for . limi•ing tki2ir exercise, Set up such astandard, and fancy, if you can, the tnis chiets which would most infallibly be the coln4?- oence. Then would you place the privileges cf this House at the mercy of contending . fadions lin . th bidding against each other at this Auction of Popularity,.uni il privilege and liberty fell a sacrifice to fteir selish and Unprincipled objects. Oae de mocracy of faclion would, be destroy, 4 cniy t o h c succeeded by. a xvorse ; extinction of all order and all virtuewouid follow in their train, ultimately to cure the absolute rule of a single individual. • Let the country remetnt:er the miseries under which, from such causes, it once suffered . : Let it: remember • the recovery it has, had :. Let it rernembrAr that period of its history When, in the reign of the first Charles, that unhappy Prince .was reduced by the constitutional exertions of the House I f Commons to desist in a great , degree, from his arbitrary acts of prerogative,' and the salutary pro spect presented itself of a free •and legitimate Go . vertiment. From 'what cause was it:that such ex.. , enions proved abortive 'lt was because a- fac= . tion sprung up in that house and. in this country, who, arrogating to themselves all the patriotism and public 'spirit in the nation, misrepresented' defamed, and crushed the wise and honest ,rnen of all parties—a faCtion who possessed great talt•mts bdt no virtues 7 ,with purity in theit-mouths, but profli gacy in their hearts—Who, talked of liberty, but meant despolism—wlio sought.the Lord, but found ~a Crown. If England, with the example of all former, iges before her; and particularly with the ‘awful example of' such a calaMitous Visita ion, shall 'be so infatuated as to relapse into such dangerous and delusive errors, then I pronounce- that she is doomed - to saffer.more grievous calamities than MIS ever yet befallen any nation upon the,earth—and what is more .galling ,and more aggravated, . she is doomed so to suffer minified and unreprieved. , Mr, ADAM complimented, in the-highest terms, the able, eloquent, and constitotionatspeech of his Right Hon. Friend. Although he was aware that the shortness of the time would render it difficult to frame such a declaration, yet he could nor help sug gesting, that previous to the measure under dsetis . sion, it would be advisable for the House 'to conic . • to some clear declaration of:their privileges, so as to prevent any diffieully in the sully:Tr:mit pro c.'.!ez.lingsi‘ and which Woold \tend-most effectually to the maintenance of their privileges. The CHANCELLOR of -the EXCHEQUER declared, that the general tenor of the eloquent speeCh of the, Right Hon. Gentleman opposite was such,, that' he should, be sorry, by recut ring to any irr;tating slab jea, to • interrupt the impression which that speech must necessarily hove . made-on the House. He could not refrain from repeating his regret,. that in a•Case' in which the Right Hon.' Gentleman himself conceived that the rights and privileges of 0 , 9 House . were at stake, he had abstained fromlend ing his assistance to the Committee,- iti'6 c rifer that they might arrive at a right conclusion. - TWRight Hon. gentleman -had talked of the unfortunate i tuation in which the House stood:--What unfortn nate situation ? Only that situation to which it most bu necessarily exposed on every exercise of its privi leges, hoWever moderate. The mere temporary imprisonment-of a Member, for the porpOse of bring ing him to the Bar to receive a reprimand, would form as good a ground for an action as the rash step (as the Right Hon. Gentleman termed it) which he had advised the. House to adopt with respect to 'Sir Francis Burdett. Besides, could any one who had fobserved the subsequent conduct of that. Hon. 'Ba ronet doubt, that if he had been brought to the Bar to be reprimandekins;ead of having been sent to . the Tower, he would have preferred an thion against the Speaker for ordering him into .custody, or that he would, when at the.B tr, have so insulted the dig 'nity of the House; as to drive them to the adoption of the severer measure With what justice, I here fore, could it be said that the Hou t se of Commons had. been brought into unheard of and unspeakabe • „ . calamity and distress •If there was any irnbec:lity in their privilege% be did not regret that that . . cility had been discovered at a time when atey,would have ample oppottunityeither to consider the mode of protecting the,right.which they ha 1, or the con stitutional means of itcquiring the power to proteel them. He deprecated, thereiore i: such a❑ emphasis on the difficulty of the situaticin i n w hi c h the House was placed, contident.that:the irlonse had not exer cised a right which they did not posses—he was co n . Went that they hid not exceeded their "privdeg•S —he was confident that no au. hority, -no Judge irr the land, when he, learned that was a titletlon in Which the ptivikges of the House of Commons were i m plicated, would determine urou it. - He entertained no applebonsion, therefore, ;that eitlitr the dignity or the privilege of the House of Cotn mons was endangered. The Law prescribed the course which the House ought to ptirsue, and which they might therefore tread without danger. After :a biding to tI:N precedent of Sir F. Pe'roberton and Sir T. Jones, he adverted to the statement made by his. Hon.. Friend, namely, that a letter might be written by the Speaker to the Lord. Chancellor, tn. which i!)" 'Chancellor would'necessarily issue a rit. 'of supersedeas. Although he could not admit that this alternative of his Hon. Friend was so absut das it was.asserted to be, yet, as such a measure would ne 'etfeclive only during the Session, he must allow, that the proceeding would be of too limited a nature tor t h e ti t j, se to a dopt. He, and those who acted witja him, had been, thought. deficient in their duty f r not having recommended the commitment of .the Solicitor. For his part, he thought it wise in the House not to avail itself for that purpose of the preCedented and unnecessary notice which had b ;!3 i